sftcd

> Currently what this PR seems to implement is a new low-level set of APIs to HPKE. I spent a bit of time playing with potential higher level APIs for...

On 15/02/2022 00:07, openssl-machine wrote: > This PR is in a state where it requires action by @openssl/omc but the last update was 61 days ago > Thanks to the...

The HPKE spec is now [RFC9180](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9180.html) so I edited the comment at the topi of this thread

> @sftcd you're more than welcome to check how badly I botch your work here... LGTM (sorry for slow response)

> The `libcrypto.num` and `libssl.num` changes looks just wrong. Please reset the libcrypto.num and libssl.num files to pristine from the master branch and run `make update`. Ah! So ``make update``...

> Please do that. I want to verify that the ABIDIFF check will detect the changes. Did that, looks like it passed the ABIDIFF one?

> It shows that there is an ABI change and that is reflected by the label. https://github.com/openssl/openssl/actions/runs/7115342092/job/19371275333?pr=22938 Just checking: that's the expected outcome given new APIs are being added isn't...

Hiya, On 18/12/2023 09:34, Hugo Landau wrote: > Realistically, this is too big to land as one PR. Yep, it's gigantic;-( If there's a way to split it into multiple...

> I don't see the issue here. IMO an existing ECH server is an acceptable test target. Hmm. Interesting. Happy to take a look again at what it'd be like...

OK, I'll take a look at splitting into separate PRs with external tooling for tests and get back here. Given the time of year that'll likely take a while (I'm...